I'm a little surprised that people from Zend is rather prefer to call php for
CGI and php-cli for CLI.
IMO, Zend products, such as Zend Encoder or Zend IDE, have more chance
to sell if PHP is used as replacement for Perl or Python (or even Java).
The name of command line interface may not affect sales of Zend products,
though.
Just my .02
--
Yasuo Ohgaki
Zeev Suraski wrote:
At 19:46 09/12/2002, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
On Mon, 09 Dec 2002, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> <ducking>
> Maybe phpsh would be a good idea for the name of the CLI? It wouldn't
> confuse ppl as much as php-cli
> </ducking>
>
> I'm really not that sure it makes sense to rename the CGI from php to
> php-cgi after such a long time. It's not as if we're breaking BC for
the
> sake of adding very much needed functionality.
>
> Anyway, I'm -0 for the change and +0 to find a more suitable name
for the
> CLI :)
I am actually in favor of CLI executable being 'php'. If it's a problem
on Windows, then we could possibly compromise and have the CGI version
being called php.exe, but I think that it's important we keep it 'php'
on UNIX.
Why? PHP as a shell is going to be used by only a fragment of the
amount of users who use it as a CGI. In most senses, it's much more PHP
than the CLI is.
Even though the old version was being used as a shell, it was still
quite clear that it is the CGI version. And it is quite clear that the
CLI version is the one that's new...
Zeev
--
PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
